The statement contradicts a report based on information from the
SpaceTrack satellite tracking service that said Falcon 9 appeared
to have disintegrated into 20 parts after reaching orbit.

That report said there was evidence for an explosion aboard Elon Musk's
rocket in orbit above the Earth. The report was carried on
Zarya, a space flight blog. The report has not been confirmed by
other more established media.

Here is SpaceX's full statement:

We have no reason to believe there was an explosion of any kind.
Based on previous launch experiences, we do know it's common that
the first measurements from Space-Track are not very accurate and
sometimes mixed up ... usually takes a few days for them to sort
it all out and that’s with fewer objects to track.

In general we have a tremendous amount of data to go through on
this end, not exactly sure when that process will be complete,
but we’ll release our findings when it is.

Normally, SpaceTrack would expect to be listing the six released
satellite combinations, the rocket body and maybe a couple of
debris items. A few hours after launch, the catalogue was showing
20 items in a scatter of orbit, indicating an explosion.

One of the satellites may be the suspect but the most likely
culprit is SpaceX’s Falcon 9. It seems to have suffered some kind
of failure after the payloads departed.

The twenty items show a scatter in apogee (1350-1654 km) and
perigee (235-415 km) values, and inclinations vary between 80°.94
and 81°.04.

The chart shows that there was explosive force involved rather
than a gentle disintegration. The cross indicates the target
orbit and the fragments’ orbits are scattered fairly evenly
around it.

Cassiope, which is designed to monitor the space environment
around Earth and serve as a communications satellite, and five
secondary payloads were delivered into their intended orbits,
Musk told reporters on a conference call.

And, indeed, parts of the Falcon 9 system are designed to explode
after launch. This launch included a test of a new system
designed to restart previously disposable booster engines that
detach from the main rocket, and have them return to earth so
they can be recovered, Reuters added:

Musk is particularly interested in developing the technology to
fly the Falcon's first stage back to the launch site or have it
gently splash down in the water so its motors can be recovered,
refurbished and reflown. Currently, after delivering their
payloads into orbit, the boosters tumble back toward Earth and
essentially explode mid-air before crashing into the sea.

While three of the first stage's nine engines did indeed restart
during the reusable rocket test, upon re-entry it began to
tumble, causing a centrifuge effect that starved the engines and
ultimately caused the fuselage to break up before it could
complete the task of fully testing the braking system.

Space.com reported that the launch didn't go completely smoothly
— an audio link was broken in the press area and reporters were
surprised when the rocket took off before anyone heard the
traditional countdown.

Zurya also noted that part of the video feed from the rocket was
lost during launch. You can see that
video below. It shows the Falcon 9 lifting off, followed by a
blank screen with the message "awaiting vehicle downlink." The
video clearly shows Falcon 9 rising into space under control, but
the blank screen repeatedly comes back into view.

Approximately one minute and 19 seconds into last night’s launch,
the Falcon 9 rocket detected an anomaly on one first stage
engine. Initial data suggests that one of the rocket’s nine
Merlin engines, Engine 1, lost pressure suddenly and an engine
shutdown command was issued. We know the engine did not explode,
because we continued to receive data from it. Panels designed to
relieve pressure within the engine bay were ejected to protect
the stage and other engines. Our review of flight data indicates
that neither the rocket stage nor any of the other eight engines
were negatively affected by this event.

The engine-out didn't affect the mission, SpaceX said at the
time:

Falcon 9 did exactly what it was designed to do. Like the Saturn
V (which experienced engine loss on two flights) and modern
airliners, Falcon 9 is designed to handle an engine out situation
and still complete its mission. No other rocket currently flying
has this ability.